[nightmarelord11]

Like what Ratta said, if the kid is thought mature enough by the parent to be able to deal with such things in games like, gore, swearing, drug abuse and nudity. Then the parent would be allowed to buy the kid that game, it's what the parent feel is appropriate for their children to look at. What i do wish though, is that the games cover was a bit more revealing, take this cover for example,


In this cover art, you can clearly see the age rating, but most parents tend to look over this small number, god knows why. They tend to look at the actual cover, which only shows a man pulling on a mask, no guns, no blood, nothing. This is one of the main flaws with games, the cover art should reveal more about the game, not the back of the box. Another reason why I think games are flawed, the game suppliers, do nothing to check who you are buying this game for, I would like to set a scenario for you know, bear with me, this all has a purpose in the end

"Hello Sir/Madame, are you looking to purchase a game today?

"Yes, i would like to purchase Dead Rising 2 for the Xbox 360."

"That will be £20 please,"

"Thank you"

*Leaves store,"

When really it should go something like this,

"Hello, Sir/Madame, are you looking to purchase a game today?

"Yes, I would like to buy GTA 4 for the PS3."

"I must warn you that this game contains, Drug use, suggestive themes, heavy violence, swearing and nudity."

"I am aware of this."

"Who are you purchasing this game for?"

"My son,"

"And how old is your son?"

"Fifteen."

"This game is rated 18 for a reason, are you sure you don't want to choose anything else?"

"You know, random store clerk, i think you're right."

As you can see, two very similar scenarios but with different outcomes, It all comes back to maturity, I recently purchased the Orange Box, but because it is rated 15, I took it to my parents and asked them if I could get this, I pointed out every little detail but they still deemed me mature enough to handle the content in this game. Maturity is key my friends. Maturity is Key.

[Eetrab]

Let me summarise:

Company A produces a video game. It is determined that the game is too violent and presents material that is not suitable for people under 18 years of age. If they wanted to make a version that is suitable, it would be ersatz.

By the law, company A is not allowed to directly distribute this game to persons under 18 years of age. This is exactly the same with stores that supply alcohol (although the age varies).

This means that under ideal circumstances, those under 18 years of age will not handle or play the game.

But this is society, and inevitably, through parents, older siblings or any type of black market dealer, those who are not allowed to have this game, hitherto untouched by those under 18 years of age, can now have their whims satisfied. Who is the provider? Commonly the parents.

The Company produces the game. That is not bad. A child having curiosity is not a crime. Parents not doing their job properly is both ignorant and stupid.

//

Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion, but sometimes, like in this case, a differing opinion is like saying it's the garden store's fault that my plant died because a possum ate it.

[Prodigy9]

Of course, parents should actually being doing their job and PARENTING in the first place.

Thread winner.

As several others have said, parents wouldn't buy alcohol for their 10-year-olds. I'd imagine that most parents wouldn't buy the bloodiest R-rated movies for their little kids either. But somehow that same restraint doesn't get applied to video games, as if an interactive form of entertainment is going to somehow make less of an impact on the kid than passively watching a movie.